?

Log in

Next Entry

Culture of Planning

Hooray, Sanctuary community.

For the first post, let's be useful and link to two articles (they're a set) which we plan to discuss in perhaps some detail this Friday, and which we provide so you have a clue what we're talking about (and so you can provide commentary if you want).

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/10/saras-sunday-rant-culture-of-planning.html and http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/10/sunday-rant-culture-of-planning-ii.html are the two articles mentioned - they're not horribly long, but they are exceedingly interesting.

It's only Monday, so we'll see what else crops up to talk about. This is the first full week of the 110th Congress, so there's sure to be SOMEthing to rant about...

Comments

( 10 comments — Leave a comment )
lirazel
Jan. 8th, 2007 07:25 pm (UTC)
*reads*
This conversation is going to need some schneeble.

And is it OK if someone, sometimes, shouts "VAGINA"?
laechim
Jan. 8th, 2007 08:07 pm (UTC)
Re: *reads*
Of course it's okay. Furthermore, I will take upon myself that weighty responsibility. If Cham doesn't beat me to it.

-Mecha
chamelaeon
Jan. 8th, 2007 08:28 pm (UTC)
Re: *reads*
If schneeble's not paying attention, we can always poke him via this community, I suppose. Hm.

Also, if we're going to get other genitalia involved, I demand the right to make up new ones and shout them.
lirazel
Jan. 8th, 2007 10:24 pm (UTC)
May I suggest one real body part per sex? After that, I suppose, the doors are open... the spouse has a favorite euphemism that certain persons have adopted; he calls testes "chinoogies". It's a long and sordid story involving college roommates and other hobos, and at some point I stopped paying attention... but you are free to use it if you wish.

By the way, "chinoogies" is standard: "chinoogs" is slang. And as far as I know, this noun is used only in the plural.

There's something to this "culture of planning" thing... I don't like the idea of all that conformity, though. ;_;
grysar
Jan. 9th, 2007 11:04 pm (UTC)
Regarding generational attitudes, Pew just came out with a survey of the 18-25 set.
http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/300.pdf

Guess that makes me a Gen Xer.
chamelaeon
Jan. 10th, 2007 02:37 pm (UTC)
Apparently I'm just barely a Gen ... Gen... *deep breath* Gen Nexter. GODS, I hate that phrase. I hate all the generation labels. Fucking retarded.

The study's interesting, regardless, and I'm sure we can tie the two together somehow.
lirazel
Jan. 10th, 2007 04:21 pm (UTC)
HAH! Once again, I confuse and confound. See, officially I'm right in the last third of the Boom (1955; Bravest is on the Boom's leading edge, being born in 1946). But in my use of tech and general social opinions, I'm more of hodge-podge.

It's an issue from time to time, as noted in my own LJ regarding the question as to whether OL friendships are "real". People my own age seem to think they are not--unless they work in high tech.
ardweden
Jan. 13th, 2007 03:24 am (UTC)
Pfft. You're not a GenXer. You're in whatever generation comes after it (whatever we want to call it), and you know it. So am I.

Those numbers aren't hard and fast by any stretch of the imagination.
kamalloy
Jan. 15th, 2007 10:25 pm (UTC)
You're right about the numbers not being hard and fast. So far I've seen 1975, 1978, and 1981 as possible end years for Generation X. So according to some researchers' opinions, you guys are both GenX.

Although, really, the whole idea of generations breaks down at some point. I've got a lot more in common with people who are five years younger than me than I do with people who are ten years older than me (or vice versa), same generation or no.

In short: you kids get off my lawn! *shakes fist*
lirazel
Jan. 10th, 2007 04:31 pm (UTC)
Alas, alas, I will not be in any state to participate in this week's Sanctuary... being drugged to the eyes and probably prone. Gomen and all that...

I did have some thoughts after reading the articles, however. It strikes me that the last generation of planners was also the last generation to have an unclouded belief in "science" and "progress"--that anything we came up with was going to be for the good. It's still possible to make a good plan and achieve the plan's goal, of course, but when we look at both the intended and unintended consequences of such planning, well... the question becomes, is skill at achieving direct physical goals the only measure of success?

Another thought: I wonder how much of the current flipflopiness is due in part to the current confusion between faith and reason? (If I hear the Shrub say one more time, "I have faith," instead of, "Our analysis points to..." I may damage this very expensive TV set here.) We've gotten used to the idea that reason cannot inform faith--that science and "gut feelings", never mind religious belief, are inextricably at war--so when there appears to be a choice where reason requires hardship and discipline and planning it's a lot easier to say, "Well, I just don't believe that." (And mind you, this is coming from a religious person.)

We all need more willingness to live with one or more pairs of ducks.
( 10 comments — Leave a comment )